Thursday, November 15, 2012

From Jihad Watch / Posted by Robert Spencer

It is good that he said it.
Not that the international media will pay any attention at all. They aid
and abet the "Palestinian" propaganda about Israelis harming civilians.
"Statement by PM Netanyahu on Operation Pillar of Defense to Israeli
Public," from IMRA, November 14:

I want to praise the IDF soldiers and commanders, led by Chief of
Staff, Lieutenant General Benny Gantz , who is commanding the operation
as we speak. I want to note the Israel Security Agency, headed by
Director Yoram Cohen, for their vital part in the operational
accomplishments that we have already achieved. I thank the citizens of
Israel for their unwavering support of this operation. I thank the
residents of southern Israel who are at the front, and exhibit strength
and restraint.

Hamas and the terror organizations decided to escalate their attacks
on the citizens of Israel over the last few days. We will not accept a
situation in which Israeli citizens are threatened by the terror of
rockets. No country would accept this, Israel will not accept it.

Today, we hit Hamas strategic targets precisely. We have
significantly debilitated their ability to launch rockets from Gaza to
the center of Israel, and we are now working to disable their ability to
launch rockets towards the south. The terrorist organizations – Hamas,
Islamic Jihad and others – are deliberately harming our citizens, while
intentionally hiding behind their citizens.

On the other hand, we avoid
harming civilians as much as possible and that is one fundamental
difference between us. It also indicates the big difference between our
objectives, and not only in our methods. They want to obliterate us from
the face of the earth and they have no qualms about hurting civilians
and innocents.

Today, we sent an unequivocal message to Hamas and the other terror
organizations, and if need be the IDF is prepared to expand the
operation. We will continue to do everything necessary to defend our
citizens."

Electoral College

The United States Constitution provides for an indirect election
of the President. That is, you didn't vote for Barack Obama or Mitt
Romney last week; you voted for electors pledged to vote for one or the
other.

The 12th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (which superseded a
large section of Article II, Section 1) suggests says that the ballots
of the electors in the several states having marked their ballots for
President and Vice President shall
"transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States,
directed to the President of the Senate; -- the President of the Senate
shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open
all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted."

On or about January 6, 2013 (probably January 7th or 8th as the 6th
is on a Sunday) that counting will take place and Barack Obama will be
declared President and Joe Biden will be declared Vice President.

That part we know all too well. What we don't pay much attention to
is the original (and un-amended) language of Article II, Section 1 which
states:

"Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may
direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and
Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress"

Note, the Constitution does not prescribe that the candidate with
the most votes in a given state be granted all of the Electors. It
leaves the "Manner" of selection up to the State Legislatures.

Indeed, if the State Legislature of Upper Iguana determined that its
Governor should choose the electors, then a popular vote would be
unnecessary as he (or she) could pick electors for what ever candidate
he (or she) desires.

Granted, either of these is unlikely in any real state except for Illinois, but it would be possible.

The current system is well known: 48 states and the District of
Columbia award all of a states' Electors to the candidate that wins the
majority of the votes in that state.

The other two states, Nebraska and Maine have a better plan: They
award Electors by Congressional District. Nebraska has three
Congressional Districts; Maine has two.

The winner in each CD gets that Elector and the candidate with the
most votes statewide gets the Electors awarded for the two Senate seats.

I have no idea what the effects on the 2012 election would have been
if all 50 states and DC had adopted that concept and it doesn't matter
because both sides knew the rules going in.
It does seem, though, that awarding Electors by CD would put more
than eight or nine states in play every four years.

In California, which has 55 EVs, Romney would have had a shot at as
many as 16 Electors in Districts likely to be represented by
Republicans.

Similarly, in Texas Obama might have picked up as many as 12 of the 38 EVs available there.

The direct election of the President would likely mean that all of
the attention would be paid to the high population areas: New York City,
LA, Chicago, Houston, Miami and so on. The smaller cities and towns
would be left out in the cold.

There may be some very good reason that I'm missing that argues
against a Congressional District selection of Electors, but I can't
think of it.

Not every CD would go for the Presidential candidate whose party is
represented by the Member of Congress, so it is not a direct one-to-one
relationship.

I understand it would make it much harder for the networks to "call" a
state the moment the polls close based upon exit polls, but the method
of electing a President shouldn't be designed for the convenience of the
national press corps.

Over the next days or weeks researchers will have voting results that
are granular to be able to determine what would have happened if the CD
system were in place in 2012; but it wasn't so the two campaigns didn't
design their efforts to reflect it.

The Constitution allows State Legislatures to determine the method of
choosing Electors, so this system doesn't need a Constitutional
amendment; it could be done in the next few months.

Memo to the States’ Governors and AGs on The Decision On Obamacare’s Exchanges: Go Churchill Or Go Home

With the president mobilizing for a barnstorming tour in support
of massive tax hikes and to, in effect, overturn last week's vote to
keep the House in GOP hands and the gavel in John Boehner's --details here on the president's plan-- the GOP is getting organized in the House and laying down markers.

The media is focused on speculation about the "big deal" and the
various scandals, but a huge story is brewing that few are watching.

The deadline for the most important political and legal decisions of
the near term is being made in every state:

But Bentley's position on the exchange --he joins at least Alaska,
Florida and Texas in just saying no-- is very welcome and hopefully a
model for other Republican governors who must by law indicate their
decisions on the exchange set-up by mid-December. Other states ought
also to study the example set by Oklahoma, and sue to overturn the
Hobbesian choice on exchanges being forced on them.

Only one state lawsuit against the forced choice on health exchanges has been filed --by the Sooners' AG, and the amended complaint is here--
and the national opposition to Obamacare should be looking for other
governors to say no and other attorneys general to file similar
challenges to the health exchange jam down.

8. In addition to that claim, Plaintiff raises new claims seeking
declaratory and injunctive relief with respect to final federal
regulations (the “Final Rule”) that were issued under Internal Revenue
Code Section 36B, as added by Section 1401 of the Act, while proceedings
in this action were stayed. The Final Rule was issued in contravention
of the procedural and substantive requirements of the Administrative
Procedures Act (“the APA”), 5 U.S.C. § 702; has no basis in any law of
the United States; and directly conflicts with the unambiguous language
of the very provision of the Internal Revenue Code it purports to
interpret.

9. More specifically, Sections 1311 and 1321(c) of the Act allows
States to choose to establish an “American Health Benefit Exchange” to
operate in the State to facilitate execution of the Act’s key
provisions. If a State elects not to establish an Exchange under Section
1311, Section 1321(b) authorizes the Secretary of Health and Human
Services to create an Exchange to operate in that state.

10. Under the Act, this choice has important consequences for the
State’s people and the State’s economy, because health insurance premium
tax credits for low-income employed individuals and employer
obligations under the Act both depend on which alternative the State
chooses. If the State elects to establish its own Exchange, the Federal
Government will make “advance payments” of premium tax credits to
insurance companies on behalf of some of the State’s residents to
subsidize health insurance enrollment through the State-created
Exchange, but the payment of the subsidy for even one employee triggers
costly obligations on the part of the employer that would not be
triggered in a non-electing State, placing the electing State at a
competitive disadvantage for jobs and job growth.

11. The Act leaves this policy judgment to each State and provides a
mechanism for each State to choose the alternative it thinks is better
for its people. The Final Rule upsets this balance by providing,
contrary to the Act, that qualifying taxpayers are eligible for premium
tax credits and “advance payments” if they enroll for health insurance
through the Exchange where they live, regardless of whether it is a
State-established Exchange or an HHS-established Exchange.

Thus, if the
Final Rule is permitted to stand, federal subsidies will be paid under
circumstances not authorized by the Congress; employers will be
subjected to liabilities and obligations under circumstances not
authorized by Congress; and States will be deprived of the opportunity
created by the Act to choose for itself whether creating a competitive
environment to promote economic and job growth is better for its people
than access to federal subsidies.

12. Oklahoma has not established or elected to establish an Exchange,
and does not expect to do so. As a result, under the plain terms of the
Act, employers in Oklahoma should not be subject to the Employer
Mandate because of a determination that an Oklahoma resident employed by
the employer in Oklahoma is entitled to advance payment of a premium
tax credit because of enrolling for coverage through an Exchange
established by HHS to operate in Oklahoma. However, the Final Rule
purports to make such an individual eligible for a premium tax credit
based on enrolling for coverage through an Exchange established by HHS
to operate in Oklahoma, with the result that an Oklahoma employer
employing such an individual will be exposed to liability under the
Employer Mandate under circumstances not provided for under the Act.
Thus, Plaintiff seeks declaratory and injunctive relief declaring the
Final Rule invalid.

This is a narrow argument aimed at a specific rule, but there are
other arguments to make, including the damage done to federalism when,
upon saying no, the enormous supertanker of Obamacare sails into a
state's legal harbor via the federal exchange and smashes all the docks
and other ships, displacing not merely the opportunity to run an
exchange but destroying countless other state-administered relationships
and regulatory balances.

States have to defend themselves against the giant takeover of
states’ powers and duties by Obamacare. The decision to “just say no” so
has to be taken by mid-December. Encourage your governor to say no and
to sue alongside of Oklahoma, perhaps engaging one of the country's
leading experts on structural federalism like Georgetown's Randy Barnett
or my own colleague at Chapman John Eastman to make the arguments to
preserve the state's legislative integrity and their independence from
D.C. Not only is this the right way to proceed for a state intent on
protecting its citizens from an ever-expanding federal government, it
may also present the Supreme Court with a second bite at the Obamacare
apple via a different set of issues not dependent on the "is the penalty
a tax" debate.

Some states are tired of the fight and their law departments not eager to spend another year battling the DOJ.

But that isn’t their choice. That choice belongs to their governor
and their attorney general. Those who don’t choose to fight now cannot
expect conservatives to fight for them in the future. Go Churchill or go
home.

The left is attempting to declare the Obamacare fight over. It isn't.
It is a 15 round fight. Conservatives won rounds when they elected
Chris Christie, Bob McDonnell and then Scott Brown after the debate was
begun.

The left won a round when the law passed was passed, and it won a
round when the Supreme Court upheld the individual mandate, but
conservatives won in that opinion as well, on Medicaid and on the reach
of the Commerce Clause.

The left scored a knock-down with the president's re-election, but
the fight isn't over if the conservatives opposed to the law get up off
the canvas and fight on. Oklahoma has, and some states have joined them,
though not yet in the courts. They should, and soon. Obamacare was
nightmare before the election, and it is a nightmare still. The
president's re-election was manifestly not about Obamacare, and the
decision is not final and won't be until every good argument is made and
every opportunity given the Supreme Court to review the law in full.

Even if the legal fight should fail, it is important for federalism
that many states pass on becoming puppets of the feds via the state
exchanges. The fiasco-in-waiting of the federal exchange should be on
the president's head, with blame not easily shifted to bungling
governors. The president broke it, so he should buy and operate it.

But only after every argument has been made, and the Supreme Court offered the opportunity to rule on the law as a whole.

Jill Khawam Kelley was the hand-picked lobbyist for Muslim nations and their agenda at Central Command.

Kelley, who is part of the soap opera that the Petraeus scandal
spawned, was in charge of hosting parties and social events to push the
Islamic agenda of Middle Eastern countries. She was seen by Muslim
Mid-East nations, especially Hezbollah-controlled Lebanon, as the “go
to” woman to push their agenda on top American generals. She was a
lobbyist for their cause and, yet, wasn’t required to register as a
lobbyist, like all others who host lavish parties for top American
officials, like she did, in an attempt to influence U.S. policy in the
Middle East.
Kelley, a dhimmi Christian Arab of Lebanese descent, was well known
in the Muslim Arab embassies of Washington for doing their bidding and
hosting their parties at and near MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, where
our nation’s top generals are based. It’s where Central Command–the
U.S. Armed Forces’ leadership over wars and military personnel Middle
East–is headquartered.

When a friend of mine said that he thought the financially troubled
Khawam sisters, Kelley and Natalie Khawam, were spies for Lebanon and
the Arab world, I originally expressed skepticism. I believed that
these twin sisters with obvious twin nose jobs were merely bimbo gold
diggers in slutty outfits, who used their Delilah ways to first nab rich
husbands, and then nab idiotic top American generals to participate in
Lifetime-Channel-worthy bitter child custody disputes. But then I
learned that Ms. Kelley, who was until this week under the radar, was
quietly involved in pushing the agenda of Muslim Arab nations on our
nation’s top generals with whom she’d grown close by design. I don’t
think it’s a coincidence that Ms. Kelley got her hooks into our two top
generals in the Middle East, David Petraeus and John Allen. I’m now
convinced that my friend, lawyer Gary Welsh of Advance Indiana, who has excellent instincts, was correct.

I’ve long written about the infiltration of Central Command at
MacDill Air Base in Tampa by Islamic terrorists. Islamic Jihad founder
and convicted Islamic terrorist, Sami Al-Arian, was an instructor on the
Middle East to our top generals at MacDill Air Force Base AT THE VERY
SAME TIME that he was planning mergers and terrorist attacks in Israel
with “the brothers of HAMAS” and while he was bringing Muslim illegal
alien Islamic terrorists to the U.S. Al-Arian’s friend and
co-conspirator, Ramadan Abdullah Shallah (one of those Al-Arian brought
here), who became the Secretary-General of the worldwide Islamic Jihad
terrorist group, was also a lecturer at MacDill and also taught our top
generals his poisonous views on the Middle East and Israel. FBI and
INS agents who investigated Shallah and Al-Arian were alarmed at the
influence these two top Islamic terrorists had over CentCom. They were
also alarmed to find many books on the inner workings of MacDill in
Shallah’s house when they raided it.

So when people ask me how I think these women were able to insert
themselves into top generals’ lives and topple them (along with,
apparently, the men they married), I think back to the fact that our top
generals gladly allowed top terrorists to infiltrate Central Command as
alleged “professors” on the Middle East. And when generals like
Petraeus and Norman Schwarzkopf, Jr. openly attack Israel and America’s relationship with Israel,
people like Jill Khawam Kelley and Al-Arian and Shallah are the reason
why. Khawam Kelley isn’t an innocent socialite. She’s an agent of
influence for Arab Muslim nations.

A military officer who is a former member of Petraeus’s
staff said Kelley was a “self-appointed” go-between for Central Command
officers with Lebanese and other Middle Eastern officials. . . . At the
parties Jill Kelley hosted at her Tampa mansion, guests were frequently
treated to the indulgences of celebrity life: valet parking, string
quartets on the lawn, premium cigars and champagne, and caviar-laden
buffets.

The main recipients of the largess were military brass — including
some of the nation’s most senior commanders — based at nearby MacDill
Air Force Base.

Kelley flaunted her access to these military VIPs. . . . The
investigations of Petraeus’s and Allen’s actions, nonetheless, have
raised questions about how Kelley, a woman with no formal military role,
cultivated such close ties to two of the nation’s most revered
generals.

One former aide to Allen, who like others spoke on the condition of
anonymity given the sensitivity of the case, suggested that Kelley had
become a de facto social ambassador among high-ranking personnel at
MacDill, home to the U.S. Central Command and Special Operations
Command.

Middle Eastern diplomats in Washington also knew Ms.
Kelley, who came from a Lebanese immigrant family and who helped arrange
social activities when dignitaries from the region visited Tampa,
diplomats said. She also sometimes attended parties at Washington
embassies.

I guarantee you that Jill Khawam Kelley wasn’t hosting visits from
dignitaries from Israel. And, other than those from Israel, every
single “Middle Eastern diplomat” in Washington is a Muslim, most of them
Muslim Arabs. And all of them Muslims with an agenda that is
anti-Israel and anti-Western. And definitely not in America’s best
interests. They come to Tampa for one reason and one reason only–to
ingratiate themselves with the top military brass at CentCom at MacDill.

And Jill Khawam Kelley was their social director in that mission.

Kelley’s sister, Natalie Khawam, was married to a top Bush
administration official, Grayson Wolfe, Director of Broader Middle East
Initiatives and Iraqi Reconstruction at the Export-Import Bank of the
United States, and frequently accompanied him on trips to the Middle
East, including to Pakistan. Before that position, Wolfe was the
Bush-installed Manager of the Private Sector Development Office of the
Coalition Provisional Authority in Baghdad, Iraq. How many of the
Khawam’s insider Arab Muslim friends did he give sweetheart contracts
to? Before It’s News
has more and asks more questions about the consulting and contracting
firm that Wolfe now heads. Although they are now embroiled in a bitter
custody fight over their son, you have to wonder what influence Khawam
had on him and what was done in the Middle East. She recently sued her
former employer, a Jewish lawyer, Barry Cohen, but gave up after her
lawsuit was shown to be phony. Cohen struck back and found that Khawam
engaged in bankruptcy fraud.

My friend wasn’t so far-fetched when he insisted the Khawam chicks are modern day Mata Haris for the Muslim Arabs.

Just look at what they’ve accomplished for the Muslim Mid-East, all
of it under the radar . . . until Paula Broadwell had the stupidity to
send her threatening e-mails and Jill Khawam Kelley had the stupidity of
complaining about it to shirtless FBI agent Frederic Humphries.

Saying the federal investigation was “the use of law enforcement
either for a personal vendetta that [Tampa military liaison] Jill
Kelley pushed through her FBI agent connection, or a political
vendetta by somebody wanting to silence, by embarrassing, humiliating
and destroying the credibility of Petraeus.”

You think...

OK, let’s cut to the chase...even if this twisted story of
generals running sexually amok while under Obama’s command had
broken weeks before the election Obama would still NOT have lost
(remember, the FIX was in even before the first ballot was cast),
but, and this sums it up, the entire Benghazi affair was kept under
lock and key by the Obama controlled main stream media to cover up
the true story of...in my opinion...Obama’s guns and weapons
running to the Muslim Brotherhood and possibly to al-Qaeda in Syria.

In other words the msm has covered-up Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s
aiding and abetting the enemy, and as such is complicit in this whole traitorous affair.

I firmly believe that Ambassador Stevens was MURDERED because he found out
the truth and needed to be shut up, and now four-star general and
‘suddenly’ former CIA head David Petraeus is involved in a sex
scandal that has ended his once illustrious career and destroyed his
family.

And while Obama bloviates on TV and in print that Patraeus’
affair posed NO treat to national security, boxes full of classified
secret documents were found in the basement of Paula Broardwell, the
now infamous 15 minute of fame military mistress...hey, let’s call
it like it is...paid whore or worse (more on that in a bit).

Paula Broadwell, the woman who I believe was a plant (in the guise
of writing Petraeus’ biography) by the Obama administration to
deliberately seduce the general to find out just how much he knew or
uncovered about Benghazi’s truth and Stevens’ murder.

So now we have a run of the mill ‘who cares’ extramarital
affair being used as subterfuge to take prying eyes off what should
be a probing investigation into major security breaches, lies, and
cover-ups. And after keeping silent since resigning last week
as head of the CIA and with his legacy in total shambles, it took
just a mere 24 hours after Republicans and others started yelling
'subpoena,' for General David Petraeus to agree to ‘voluntarily’
testify before the House Committee investigating Benghazi.

But guys remember this important fact...Petraues now has until
tomorrow to 'prepare' his script, or worse... have it written for him,
and have it checked and rechecked again before he opens his mouth
...and LIES for Obama.

Now we have to wonder what Obama has on Petraeus...and it’s NOT
that he had an affair as affairs are a dime a dozen these days.

So, what does Obama have on Patreaus...and why did Broadwell have
classified documents in her possession? There is a rumbling of
a thought deep inside me that Putin, yes ‘that’ Putin, is somehow
involved, because remember Obama’s infamous words about what he’ll
be able to do after he’s re-elected.

Is Paula Broadwell really a Russian spy...it would fit well into
my supposition that Benghazi was a weapons smuggling operation gone
bad, especially when you start adding up all the separate pieces of
the puzzle and fit them into the whole.

And Petraeus found out and must be silenced with the long over
affair the catalyst for that silencing.

So it now it comes down to disgraced four-star general David Petraeus
to either turn traitor and (as I'm sure instructed to) lie about what he knows...or possibly do
the right thing and honor the 'U.S. Soldier's Creed'* and tell the
truth...the whole truth and nothing but the truth...both under oath
and under the eye of ‘We the People’ demanding the truth.

Tomorrow will tell, and I hope and pray that Patraeus does the right thing for love of country and for the families of those lost.

*The Soldier’s CreedI am an American Soldier.I am a Warrior and a member of a team.I serve the people of the United States and live the Army Values.

I will always place the mission first.I will never accept defeat.I will never quit.I will never leave a fallen comrade.

I am disciplined, physically and mentally tough, trained and
proficient in my warrior tasks and drills.I always maintain my arms, my equipment and myself.I am an expert and I am a professional.I stand ready to deploy, engage, and destroy the enemies of theUnited States of America in close combat.I am a guardian of freedom and the American way of life.I am an American Soldier.

EMAIL FOLLOWERS

Follow My Posts by Email

The Patriot Factor

I am an American Patriot...part of the grassroots movement of bloggers spreading the truth the media will not. I am also co-host with Craig Andresen of RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS on RSP Radio at: https://streamingv2.shoutcast.com/right-side-patriots